When asked when Sabah can expect to finally receive the 40 per cent federal revenue entitlement affirmed by the courts, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim gave an answer that left many scratching their heads.
In an impromptu exchange at the bustling Gaya Street Sunday Market in Kota Kinabalu, Anwar told a member of the public that the federal government already allocates RM17 billion to Sabah — even though it only collects RM10 billion in revenue from the state.
“Don’t listen to political campaigns of others, listen to me — I am the prime minister,” he was heard saying in a video that has since gone viral.
At face value, it sounded like a generous gesture. But upon closer inspection, it raised a fundamental question: If the government is already giving more than 40 per cent, then why resist giving what is constitutionally due?
After all, if one truly wishes to be generous, why not start by fulfilling an obligation? Giving more than what’s asked should make everyone happy — Sabah gets what it is rightfully entitled to, and Putrajaya gets to keep its moral and political credibility intact.
Yet, the issue remains as tangled as ever. Whenever a simple solution that could make everyone happy turns into a bureaucratic puzzle that leaves everyone frustrated, one can be sure that there’s more beneath the surface.
As Clausewitz once wrote, “War is simple, but even the simplest things are hard in war.” The same can be said of Malaysian federalism — a battlefield of paperwork and political calculations.
The High Court’s ruling in Kota Kinabalu recently reaffirmed Sabah’s constitutional right to 40 per cent of federal revenue collected from the state under Article 112C of the Federal Constitution. It ordered negotiations between the federal and state governments to begin within 90 days and conclude within 180 days.
This was hailed as a major victory for Sabah, but in Putrajaya, it triggered hesitation and political discomfort.
Government spokesman and Communications Minister Fahmi Fadzil later clarified that the 109-page written judgment needed to be “thoroughly examined” by the Attorney-General’s Chambers to ensure that all mechanisms were clearly understood and that there would be “no irregularities or actions that contravene the constitution.”
Fahmi said the government must also consider practical questions — for instance, what happens if the 180-day negotiation period expires, especially when the Sabah government is currently under an interim administration and may not have the mandate to make major financial decisions.
His remarks reflect a deeper anxiety within the federal government: the fear that recognising Sabah’s 40 per cent entitlement could open fiscal floodgates — legally, politically, and historically.
Despite the cautious tone, Fahmi insisted that the unity government remains committed to defending Sabah’s rights and ensuring justice for its people. He noted that this administration has already resolved nine out of thirteen claims under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) and increased interim payments to Sabah from RM126 million to RM600 million.
But for many Sabahans, these gestures, however substantial, are beside the point. What matters is the recognition — not just the amount. The 40 per cent claim is not a handout or an act of generosity; it is a constitutional entitlement, the fulfilment of a promise made when Sabah agreed to join Malaysia in 1963.
The issue has already claimed its first political casualty. Ewon Benedick, the UPKO president and former Entrepreneur Development and Cooperatives Minister, resigned from the federal Cabinet after openly disagreeing with the Attorney-General’s position. He said it would be “awkward” to remain in government while holding an opposing view on Sabah’s rights.
His departure underscores how emotionally and politically charged this issue has become. And with the 17th Sabah state election on the horizon, the 40 per cent debate is certain to be front and centre.
DAP secretary-general Anthony Loke has already said that the party supports the High Court’s decision and urged that the review process “be expedited.” He added that this matter is not new — that past governments, including those led by critics of the current administration, had failed to conduct the reviews required every five years since 1974.
This layered political drama — of competing narratives, cautious legalese, and rising public frustration — shows how something so straightforward has become deeply convoluted.
If the federal government truly believes it is already giving more than 40 per cent, then fulfilling Sabah’s constitutional entitlement should not be difficult. Yet, its reluctance suggests that this is not just about numbers — it’s about control, precedent, and the fear of opening Pandora’s box.
Because once you acknowledge Sabah’s full entitlement, Sarawak will surely come knocking next.
In the end, it’s not the arithmetic that’s difficult — it’s the politics. When giving what is due becomes a matter of national debate, the question isn’t how much Sabah deserves, but how long Putrajaya can keep pretending that generosity is a substitute for justice.
Let’s see how the cookies crumble.
TheRealNehruism (nehru.sathiamoorthy@gmail.com) is a content creator under the Newswav Creator programme, where you get to express yourself, be a citizen journalist, and at the same time monetize your content & reach millions of users on Newswav. Log in to creator.newswav.com and become a Newswav Creator now!
The User Content (as defined on Newswav Terms of Use) above including the views expressed and media (pictures, videos, citations etc) were submitted & posted by the author. Newswav is solely an aggregation platform that hosts the User Content. If you have any questions about the content, copyright or other issues of the work, please contact creator@newswav.com.
